Anderson v. Southern Cotton Oil Co.

Citations

• 73 Fla. 432

Syllabus

<p>1/ In determining whether error was committed in directing a verdict, due consideration should be given- to the organic right of trial by jury. Otherwise fundamental principles may be subordinated to procedure or convenience.</p> <p>2. The considerations and legal principles that guide the judicial discretion in directing a verdict, and in granting a new trial on the evidence are not the same.</p> <p>3. In directing a verdict, the court is governed by practically the same rules that are applicable in demurrers to evidence.</p> <p>4. A party in moving for' a directed verdict admits not only the facts stated in the evidence adduced, but also admits every conclusion favorable to the adverse party that a jury might fairly and reasonably infer from the evidence.</p> <p>5. It is reversible error to direct a verdict for one party when there is substantial evidence tending to prove the issue upon which the jury could lawfully find a verdict for the opposite party.</p> <p>6. Where different conclusions may fairly be drawn from the evidence as to whether an employee driver of an automobile was acting within the express or implied authority of the defendant employer at the time his . alleged negligence caused the injury complained of, the evidence should be submitted to the jury under appropriate instructions.</p> <p>7. Where with the acquiescence of the employer an employee while engaged with the employer’s automobile in the' general line of his authority uses the automobile for his own purposes, and while doing so injures one on the street, the jury should be permitted to determine under appropriate instructions whether the defendant employer is liable.</p>